MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098861925

THE THREE REFORMATION SOLAS AND TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY ETHICAL ISSUES

2004· article· en· W7098861925 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedical History and Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlessingGospelFaithEthical issuesChristianity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay was composed at the request of the National Church Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada to assist the church in considering the matter of the blessing of same-sex relationships. Most members of our churches – and perhaps not a few pastors – would be hard-pressed to name the “three solas ” identified with the Reformation. They are sola scriptura, sola gratia and sola fide, that is, scripture alone, by grace alone, through faith alone. While historically important as the rallying cry of the magisterial Reformers, they continue to be important for a church that seeks to uphold the Gospel insights Luther brought to the church. If we are an evangelical and reforming church still, it will be in our upholding of the three solas. Not surprisingly – since it is a relatively modern issue – none of the three solas speaks explicitly to many contemporary ethical issues, including the issue of the blessing of longtime homosexual unions. The Bible certainly has passages that concern marriage, but the principle of sola scriptura could not for the Reformers, and so cannot now, simply be equated with “the Book ” as if the issue requires no more explanation than that. Given that none of the solas deals explicitly with many of the ethical issues now facing the

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical History and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207